AA99 v GE Money Car Loan

[AA99]

Thanks Dave, have pm'd you

[lexis200]

I asked the FOS about what they can do whilst there's a complaint with them too. Basically it was pretty much what they want.

 

Having a complaint with the FOS is, (according to the FOS), not putting the account in dispute and does not preclude the creditor adding charges/interest, calling you, writing to you, otherwise hounding the hell out of you, or selling the debt.

 

Apparently the theory is that there is kind of a gogw going on when there is a complaint in which should mean they don't do this stuff, however when they inevitably do do it they are not technically doing anything wrong. Just immoral in my view, but there you go.

 

Anyway, that's what they told me:)

[AA99]

Lexis thanks for your input. That was my opinion too. However, I also have this

 

FLA :: Consumer finance :: Overview

 

to complete online aswell. GEMoney are members:cool:

[AA99]

Received this letter from Link today, they have bought my debt:mad:

Responses pleeeeeeeeeease

 

http://i390.photobucket.com/albums/oo349/AA99/GEMoney/LetterfromLink.jpg

[Viscount Stair]

Equitable assignment, not legal assignment - for starters.

 

Any proceedings would still have to be brought by (or, at least in the name of) GE.

 

You would - I think - still have the benefit of any set off against GE (eg a counter claim for harassment).

 

Contractual basis for the threatened administration fee? Breach of OFT guidelines in and of itself.

 

Just a few random thoughts on the letter alone - need to read the whole thread, which I will settle down to do later.

[davey77]

And as was previously mentioned.. if was a loan for a car purchase then their threat to repossess the car is mute?

 

Besides, i thought GE sold it to Asset on the 12th Jan?

[AA99]

And as was previously mentioned.. if was a loan for a car purchase then their threat to repossess the car is mute?

 

Besides, i thought GE sold it to Asset on the 12th Jan?

 

 

Thanks davey, no GE passed it to EDR (their in-house DCA) and then Shoosmiths........

 

VS, thanks for that, will sit tight for some more thoughts!

Edited February 4, 2009 by AA99

[surprise]

Personally, I would invest a £1.00 and send for a copy of the agreement. You will then see whether GE passed the agreement over when they assigned it. Quite often they don't. Don't forget don't sign the letter. I think you already have a copy but don't worry about that, it is worth seeing what they have.

[AA99]

Hi surprise, thanks for bouncing in so quickly:)

 

Yes, I have CCA from GE, you mean, send CCA to Link now:???: I have a recorded call with Shoosmiths who didn't have a copy to hand when I spoke with them in December

[surprise]

Yes, send a CCA request to Link - if they have got a copy then they are snookered, all the threats in the world won't do them any good. Quite often no paperwork gets handed over, if they can't supply you with a copy and they have to ask GE for it there is no saying they will hand it over. I presently have a case where a DCA has bought a debt with no paperwork and the original creditor have been asked for the agreement and have not handed it over.

[lexis200]

Hi AA:)

 

I'm with everyone else - it's all a load of hot air.

 

They can't do a load of the stuff they threaten (why do they always seem to forget they need to go through many steps, and you need to fail to deal with those steps before bailiffs come into the picture etc)

 

They say 'assigned the benefit' of the debt - is this them trying the rights but not duties line out in a different format? They then say it's been sold - which is it?

 

Why would they pass you onto a DCA - they are one! Are they just not very good at their job and are already anticipating failing at it?

 

The admin fee is against OFT guidelines (for what it's worth:rolleyes:)

 

Am I remembering right that the agreement was fairly lax in most respects? If so I don't think I'd even bother CCA'ing them as they really can't do anything, copy them the letter to GE, and ask why they're trying to collect on a dodgy account. (If I'm thinking of another thread here and they have sent a decent agreement just ignore me and get the CCA out to them:))

 

Oh, and ask them if you're definitely who they want as it looks like they haven't got the sale detail down correctly:p

 

Lexis:) x

[surprise]

The reason I would CCA them you would know exactly what paperwork they have got and it would give you peace of mind if they couldn't come up with the agreement. You would be in a stronger position if they fail to come up with a copy of the agreement within 12 days.

[AA99]

I have got a perfectly acceptable CCA from them, in my opinion, but nobody's commented definitely on it

 

I'm holding on to a phone call with Shoesmiths which I'll post later (davey77:eek:) and an invalid DN I wanna see the judge (that's my 4th thread I've said that this week!)

 

I want this all over with all these creditors!!!! Wish I could have a court to myself for the day and DO them, one by one, (rubbing hands with glee, better stop now:eek:)

 

http://i390.photobucket.com/albums/oo349/AA99/GEMoney/GEMoneyDNLetter31Aug2008.jpg

[pt2537]

I have got a perfectly acceptable CCA from them, in my opinion, but nobody's commented definitely on it

 

Really? do you have it posted on here? if so can you let me have a link and i will have a look

[lexis200]

Ok, my mistake, it was a dodgy DN wasn't it:oops:

 

The thing with CCA'ing (only IMHO:)) them if you know GE had a valid document is that they just need to ask GE for a copy and you're back where you started. Seeing as GE will need to be keeping that agreement for some time, it's unlikely they've just chucked it now otherwise they'd be open to money laundering issues. Of course, it is only a quid so maybe worth it just for peace of mind.

 

I've been back through your thread and I can't see any posts saying you have a second, valid DN sent to you? Did you get one and I've just missed the post (your last post suggests not:))? If they didn't send a second, valid one, then they're in a bit of a pickle for terminating. Hopefully that is the case and a point you can hammer home to any DCA who comes along, as they can't collect on the full balance now anyway.

 

Lexis

[surprise]

Paul

 

Agreement in #59

[lexis200]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1880383.html

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1900943.html

 

PT, here's the two posts with the agreement AA was sent so you don't need to trawl back through everything!

[lexis200]

While you were posting I was looking for the same thing surprise:D - I didn't see your post before I stuck mine on, sorry:)

[pt2537]

right

 

First observations

 

It aint secured on the car so they can go suck it as far as repo'ing the car goes

 

should be headed as a Hire purchase agreement if they want the rights to recover the car!!!!!

[pt2537]

also the agreement doesnt state the deposit so i think there may be an issue over the amount of credit and the cash price being different for the car

[AA99]

Thank you, thank you, thank you, all of you:)

 

What shall I do next????? Do I still have to gather more defence or have I got enough:???: (to sue them!)

SHoesmith.mp3

[pt2537]

AA99

 

was there any deposit paid for the car? if so how much

 

also if there was a deposit, is the deposit set out Anywhere on the documents you have??

 

Id be very very interested as if there was no deposit id argue that the amount of credit or the cash price ( both of which are prescribed terms) one of them is incorrectly stated thus rendering the agreement improperly executed and unenforceable

[pt2537]

infact the deeper i dig the more i find

 

under the amount of credit for the warranty loan £1795 now that is the amount of credit

 

so add to that the total charge for credit which is stated as £861.80

 

now when i went to school and did my A and O level maths adding the two together you get £2656.80 NOT the £3169.37 that the agreement states as being payable

 

its no exaggeration but you are being over charged based upon what i see before me

[AA99]

The only place it is quoted is on a photocopy of the Finance Invoice from Carcraft to Me at the wrong address and the invoice no. ends in /GE HP and was attached to my CCA from them which in turn was 2 photocopies, First page numbered 1 of 4, second page numbered 2 of 4.

 

The CCA refers to Motor Loan and then underneath Fixed Sum Loan Agreement governed by CCA 1974

 

I have pages 3 and 4 of 4 but they are just T & C's with no references nos. except to refer to "you" and "us".

 

I also have 2 separate receipts for my deposit which was paid in 2 parts that I 'may be able to put my hands on'.....................

[AA99]

infact the deeper i dig the more i find

 

under the amount of credit for the warranty loan £1795 now that is the amount of credit

 

so add to that the total charge for credit which is stated as £861.80

 

now when i went to school and did my A and O level maths adding the two together you get £2656.80 NOT the £3169.37 that the agreement states as being payable

 

its no exaggeration but you are being over charged based upon what i see before me

 

The figures started bothering me in post #51